Abstract
Many factors need to be considered when choosing the mode of delivery of immunoglobulin (IgG) replacement therapy for a given patient with primary immunodeficiency disease (PIDD). Despite some general guidance as provided in the previous discussions, a number of ongoing questions remain. This article attempts to provide some answers and clarification for clinical situations in which the choice of intravenous IgG (IVIG) or subcutaneous IgG (SCIG) may be ambiguous.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Orange JS, Grossman WJ, Navickis RJ, Wilkes MM. Impact of trough IgG on pneumonia incidence in primary immunodeficiency: a meta-analysis of clinical studies. Clin Immunol. 2010;137:21–30.
Lucas M, Lee M, Lortan J, Lopez-Granados E, Misbah S, Chapel H. Infection outcomes in patients with common variable immunodeficiency disorders: relationship to immunoglobulin therapy over 22 years. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;125:1354–60.e4.
Chen Y, Stirling RG, Paul E, Hore-Lacy F, Thompson BR, Douglass JA. Longitudinal decline in lung function in patients with primary immunoglobulin deficiencies. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2011;127:1414–7.
Shapiro R. Subcutaneous immunoglobulin therapy by rapid push is preferred to infusion by pump: a retrospective analysis. J Clin Immunol. 2010;30:301–7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Torgerson, T.R., Bonagura, V.R. & Shapiro, R.S. Clinical Ambiguities—Ongoing Questions. J Clin Immunol 33 (Suppl 2), 99–103 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10875-012-9851-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10875-012-9851-4